Data repositories may store data using generic schemas with loosely typed tables that have no clear correspondences among related data and metadata. For example, in an effort to facilitate configurability and model evolution, repository products may provide a meta-model with a loosely typed schema (e.g., no relational correspondences among related data and metadata) for describing assets registered in the repository. Storing the data using a loosely typed schema may provide the benefit of allowing customers to make changes to the models that are shipped with the repository by adding their own attributes, adding new metadata entity types, and/or making other changes. However, relational tools may not work on a repository that uses a loosely typed schema to store data in the repository. For example, reporting tools may not be capable of reporting on metadata stored using a loosely typed schema. Furthermore, the generic nature of the repository tables may make it difficult for a user to directly query the repository data using specific terminology that was used to create a model of the repository data.